If Iran does not change the political course, the US will exert unprecedented pressure on the country, including imposing the most stringent sanctions in history.
On May 21, 2018, the US Secretary of State, M. Pompeo, spoke at a non-governmental foundation of the Heritage Foundation with a program speech on the policy of the US administration towards Iran.
The US believes that the course chosen by the current leadership of Iran is unacceptable and unproductive.
If Iran does not refuse to implement the chosen political line, the US will put unprecedented financial pressure on the regime.
Sanctions will only increase and become more painful, M. Pompeo promised.
With active economic pressure, the US intends to put Iran ahead of the choice: either continue to sponsor military operations abroad, which the US regularly accuses Iran of, or stop doing it and preserve its economy.
Also, M. Pompeo listed the accompanying tasks, which the State Department intends to solve jointly with the US Defense Ministry and Middle Eastern partners.
Among these tasks are ensuring freedom of navigation in the waters of the region, preventing and countering Iran’s hostile activity in cyberspace, neutralizing Iran’s henchmen and the Hezbollah organization of the Shiite organization controlled by them around the world.
In parallel, the United States is ready to work with Iran to resolve the current crisis, including by concluding a new agreement to replace the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JFAP) on the Iranian nuclear program.
On May 8, 2018, US President D. Trump took the decision to withdraw from the USAP from the US, and 6 international mediators in 2015.
According to D. Trump, the SVPD could not guarantee that Iran would never have nuclear weapons and that he would renounce malicious behavior.
The policy of Iran over the past few years shows that it is impossible to disentangle Iran’s nuclear aspirations from the overall picture of security in the region, M. Pompeo believes.
- Pompeo formulated for Iran 12 conditions on which it is possible to conclude a new agreement with the US:
– Termination of works on uranium enrichment,
– refusal of works on processing of plutonium,
– the non-proliferation of ballistic missiles and the cessation of the development of missiles capable of carrying nuclear weapons,
– the disclosure of the nuclear program to IAEA experts,
– ensuring unrestricted access to nuclear development sites,
– End of support for terrorist groups in the Middle East – Hezbollah, Hamas, Taliban, Yemeni rebels and harboring al-Qaeda field commanders,
– withdrawal of all forces under the Iranian command, from Syria,
– stopping the support of terrorism by the special forces Al-Quds of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC),
– the rejection of threats against neighboring countries, many of which are allies of the United States, including Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates,
– Ending the threat to international maritime transport,
– refusal of hostile actions in cyberspace,
– grant freedom to all detained citizens of the United States.
Under these conditions, the US agrees to conclude a new agreement with Iran.
The agreement may take the form of a two-sided agreement, which would have to be sent for approval by the US Congress.
In fact, the US delivered an ultimatum to Iran, proposing conditions that were inherently unacceptable for a sovereign country.
The motivation for American policy is obvious – the US wants to force Iran to withdraw from the SVPD and lay the blame for the collapse of the agreement again on Iran.
It is also clear that M. Pompeo’s statement is aimed not only at Iran, but also at other members of the SVAP, which are striving to maintain the agreement.
The UK, Germany and France called on all participants of the SVAP to continue to fully implement it.
Russia also said it would seek to maintain the agreement, despite US plans to resume the sanctions regime against Iran.
Iranian President H. Roukhani said that the EU should guarantee compliance with Iran’s interests in the SVAP in order to maintain the agreement in force.
Negotiations between the EU and Iran on this issue are already under way, which the US is not happy with.
The new Washington list, of course, includes “a complete cessation of uranium enrichment,” or “zero enrichment.” It should be noted that this item was in the center of the American-Iranian conflict for ten years (from 2003 to 2013) and placed Iran, on the one hand, and the US and Israel, on the other, on the brink of war.
However, Iran was never broken, despite tough international sanctions, with losses exceeding $ 185 billion. As a result, former US President Barack Obama called the idea of “zero enrichment” inside Iran something that can only materialize in an “ideal world.”
Of the 12 demands of Pompeo, Iran will almost certainly refuse to accept at least eight. These include: the widespread admission of inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the curtailment of the ballistic missile program, the cessation of support for the Lebanese organization Hezbollah, the Palestinian Hamas movement and the Islamic Jihad group, the withdrawal of troops from Syria, the refusal to support the Huti rebels in Yemen and the agreement to disarm the Shiite military formations in Iraq.
Simply put, the Trump administration asks the Iranian government to change its identity.
The European allies of the United States not only condemned Trump’s decision to withdraw from the nuclear deal (formally known as the “Joint Comprehensive Action Plan”), but also challenged the Americans, which has not happened since the end of World War II.
France called on Europe to confront Washington and not act as “vassals”. The head of the EU foreign policy department, Federica Mogerini, also criticized Trump, saying that “today, it seems, screaming, insulting, harassing, and destroying what already exists is a trend of our time.”
The question arises: why did the Americans take a step that will almost certainly prove to be a failure?
According to a number of American and European media, the White House overestimates the power of sanctions in changing the identity of the Iranian government and underestimates its will to resist external pressure.
In this regard, it is appropriate to recall the words of John Sovers, one of the British negotiators in 2005, and then head of the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), who once said that “Tehran will begin enriching uranium even at the cost of war.”